Bargaining Simulation 2 Personal Analysis

Despite attempting to predict the eventual outcome of the negotiation, I did not anticipate the confrontations between Local H-56 and the management of Hotel Zinnia. Although they initially agreed to engage in integrative bargaining, the union and management subsequently entered an intense negotiation. When Local H-56 presented its proposal of wage increases and health insurance, management immediately responded with a counterproposal that surprised the union. Both the union and management eventually behaved confrontationally, accusing each other of bargaining unreasonably and focusing on the trivial aspects of the negotiation. Moreover, as the union and management felt increasingly frustrated, they suffered from a lack of unity in their teams. The union could not fulfill its objectives because its lead negotiator prevented other team members from contributing to the negotiation. On the other hand, several team members of management struggled to assert their authority as the lead negotiator. After observing these issues, I ultimately believe that the union and management failed to achieve their individual objectives. Moreover, by approaching the negotiation with a zero-sum strategy, I assert that the union and management failed to reach a mutually beneficial contract. At the same time, both sides of the bargaining table lacked cohesive teams and therefore struggled under the pressure of the negotiation.

I believe that the union and management did not fulfill their objectives and consequently reached a settlement that did not improve Zinnia’s future competitiveness in the market. Although the union and management initially agreed to focus on wages and health insurance, they bargained a contract that does not reflect their objectiv...

... middle of paper ...

...during the negotiation. Because they did not explicitly articulate their objectives to each other, the union and management did not reach a settlement that was mutually beneficial. I believe both teams prioritized “winning” over fulfilling their initial objectives. Therefore, I better understood how both teams suffered under pressure during the negotiation because they realized they could no longer rely on a zero-sum strategy. Moreover, I realized how important team cohesiveness is to the bargaining process. Both the union and management lacked basic cohesiveness among their team members and consequently exacerbated the contentious and emotional environment that they created during the negotiation. Nevertheless, under these circumstances I believe the union and management ultimately reached an adequate proposal that satisfied both sides of the bargaining table.